Hello
I found the proposal by Bernhard Pieber and Ralph Johnson to introduce package comments?
It was in the thread HttpView2 where I think some people interested in documentation will miss it.
An application could be to automatically generate documentation, i.e. for example at Squeaksource.
--Hannes
From the HttpView2 thread
On 4/23/10, Ralph Johnson johnson@cs.uiuc.edu wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 5:39 AM, Bernhard Pieber bernhard@pieber.comwrote:
- IMHO, there should be first class package comments along the lines of
class and method comments, i.e. version controlled in PackageInfo. This would greatly improve the Monticello browser. And SqueakSource could use them as project descriptions. (I once argued [1] that the easiest implementation of this would be a PackageInfo subclass for each package. Its class comment would be the package comment. Pre and post load code could be put there as well. You could reuse all the development tools like that.)
[1] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2005-February/088181....
This seems like a good idea. What tools would have to change to make this work, and could we make this change backwards compatible? For example, if you move the preload and postload code to the PackageInfo subclass then you could leave forwarding code behind. Tools wouldn't bother displaying the forwarding code if they saw the PackageInfo subclass, but would keep it so that older versions of the tools would still work.
-Ralph